사해행위취소
1. To revoke a gift agreement concluded on February 12, 2012 between the Defendant and C.
2. The defendant is about KRW 70 million to the plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On January 15, 2008, the Plaintiff owned from Nonparty C on January 15, 2008, and No. 61, 1007, Dong, 1007 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
(2) On February 4, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant representing C on behalf of C, setting the deposit amount of the said lease agreement as KRW 310 million (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and the said increased deposit amount to KRW 50 million (hereinafter “the said increased deposit”). On February 6, 2012, the Defendant, as the wife of C, remitted KRW 5 million to the account in the name of Korea in the name of C on February 10, 2012.
3) On February 12, 2012, C remitted the amount of KRW 70 million out of the deposit remitted from the Defendant to the Defendant. 4) The Plaintiff participated in the auction procedure of F real estate rent to the Seoul Central District Court, which was applied by the Suwon Saemaul Bank, the mortgagee of the instant real estate, and was distributed KRW 235 million, but the increased amount of KRW 75 million was not paid, and so far, C did not receive a refund from C.
B. At the time when the insolvent C remitted the amount of KRW 70 million to the Defendant, the real estate in this case was merely the market price of KRW 1 billion. On the other hand, the small property was the debt of KRW 310 million for the refund of deposit to the Plaintiff, KRW 678 million for the borrowed loan to the Suwon Saemaul Bank, KRW 71,095,890 for the security deposit obligation to the K&A, KRW 795,890 for the K&A, KRW 795,00 for the Korean City Bank, and KRW 66,974,310 for the borrowed loan or the indemnity obligation to G, the head of which was the amount of KRW 1,126,865,20 (=310,000,000 KRW 678,000,000,000 for KRW 710,095,8979,9709,9709).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 13, each fact-finding result, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff in excess of the existence of the preserved claim and the debt C.